WAS: How safe is it, really?

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:11:42 -0500, "Happy Dog"
wrote:

"zatatime" wrote in message
On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 05:05:47 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 03:59:48 GMT, tony roberts
wrote:

BUT:
Most light aircraft accidents are caused through continued flight into
IFR (read - don't even attempt to fly there there) weather.

To be more clear: The accidents of this type are for VFR (good
weather) pilots without training on how to effectively operate an
aircraft in IFR (bad weather) conditions. For June's understanding,
these are people that only have the license your husband got first.
Since he is now working toward his instrument ticket these statistics
are greatly reduced.

Just don't want you to think that the added training he is going for
makes this far more dangerous. It will actually make him safer
overall.

I don't believe statistically IFR rated pilots have a better safety
record.
It is a false assumption.

IFR pilot's have a better safety record in IFR conditions than VFR
pilots do in IFR conditions, which is all I was trying to say. I may
not have been perfectly clear.

VFR pilots don't legally fly in IFR conditions.

Exactly.

Your statement "To be more
clear: The accidents of this type [continued illegal flight into IMC] are
for VFR (good weather) pilots without training on how to effectively operate
an aircraft in IFR (bad weather) conditions." is quite clear and
substantially incorrect.

Do you have any statistics to back this up? You're saying VFR pilot's
who continue into IFR conditions have a better safety record than IFR
pilot's operating legally in IFR conditions?

I'd love to see the facts to back this one up.

z

Yep, AOPA. Every year they publish a summary of accident stats and
their accident guy writes the occasional article on scud running. The
only thing that makes sense to me is the attiutde that "I have the
rating, I can always get a clearance."



Happy Dog wrote:
"Newps" wrote in message

Not just VFR pilots. Happens to a surprising number if instrument rated
pilots (flying VFR) as well. I'll try to find some stats.


Here's what you'll find...Instrument rated pilots are far more likely to
get into farming by scud running than VFR only pilots.


You got stats on this? All I've seen are stats on continued flight into
IMC.

moo

zatatime wrote:

You're saying VFR pilot's
who continue into IFR conditions have a better safety record than IFR
pilot's operating legally in IFR conditions?

No, not the legal flights. The stats clearly show that an instrument
rated pilot is much more likely to die by continued VFR into IMC than a
nonrated pilot.

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 14:56:42 -0700, Newps
wrote:



zatatime wrote:

You're saying VFR pilot's
who continue into IFR conditions have a better safety record than IFR
pilot's operating legally in IFR conditions?

No, not the legal flights.
Thank you. This was my point.

The stats clearly show that an instrument
rated pilot is much more likely to die by continued VFR into IMC than a
nonrated pilot.

Agreed. Possibly for the reason you posted in the other thread.

z

"Newps" wrote in message
...
Happy Dog wrote:
"Newps" wrote in message

Not just VFR pilots. Happens to a surprising number if instrument rated
pilots (flying VFR) as well. I'll try to find some stats.

Here's what you'll find...Instrument rated pilots are far more likely to
get into farming by scud running than VFR only pilots.

You got stats on this? All I've seen are stats on continued flight into
IMC.

Yep, AOPA. Every year they publish a summary of accident stats and their
accident guy writes the occasional article on scud running.

Got a cite?

The only thing that makes sense to me is the attiutde that "I have the
rating, I can always get a clearance."

Makes sense, how? The hardest time to get a clearance is when a bunch of
people need one at once.

m

"Newps" wrote in message
zatatime wrote:

You're saying VFR pilot's
who continue into IFR conditions have a better safety record than IFR
pilot's operating legally in IFR conditions?

No, not the legal flights. The stats clearly show that an instrument
rated pilot is much more likely to die by continued VFR into IMC than a
nonrated pilot.

But they don't compare the frequency of this event for each rating. So the
stats don't say much about ability to handle IMC. But if anyone bases an
opinion that VFR pilots are safer in IMC, they're crazy.

moo

Happy Dog wrote:


Got a cite?

AOPA.org




The only thing that makes sense to me is the attiutde that "I have the
rating, I can always get a clearance."


Makes sense, how? The hardest time to get a clearance is when a bunch of
people need one at once.

They don't die trying to get a clearance, they never bother to try.

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 19:26:13 -0500, "Happy Dog"
wrote:

But if anyone bases an
opinion that VFR pilots are safer in IMC, they're crazy.

I haven't seen anyone say that in the thread.

z

"zatatime" wrote in message
But if anyone bases an
opinion that VFR pilots are safer in IMC, they're crazy.

I haven't seen anyone say that in the thread.

Me neither. My point is that it's not a really helpful stat.

moo

"Newps" wrote in message
Happy Dog wrote:

Got a cite?

AOPA.org

Can you be a bit more specific? I assume that you have a reference in mind.

The only thing that makes sense to me is the attiutde that "I have the
rating, I can always get a clearance."

Makes sense, how? The hardest time to get a clearance is when a bunch of
people need one at once.

They don't die trying to get a clearance, they never bother to try.

Again, you have some stats on this? Are you saying that, in almost all
cases, IFR pilots just fly into IMC and keep going until they hit something?
Or is it mostly scud-running?

moo